Try Crysis 2 with the DX11/High res texture pack. Even my GTX 680 with a hefty overclock only gets 30-50 FPS at 1440p. I highly doubt a 660TI can maintain 60 FPS at 1080 or 1200p.

Crysis 2 ramped up the tessellation in an effort to make some gamer's think that their rigs were not powerful enough to run the game so that you would run out and buy another GTX 580. But the reality was that all you needed to do was turn down the tessellation by a notch or two on this console port and you would lose zero eye candy but you would be $500 richer. Please read the article below from techreport its a good read on how Crysis 2 is not as demanding as Crytek and the card makers would have you believe. After reading the article I turned down tessellation to 32X and can run the game on ultra no problems @ 1080p.

Try Crysis 2 with the DX11/High res texture pack. Even my GTX 680 with a hefty overclock only gets 30-50 FPS at 1440p. I highly doubt a 660TI can maintain 60 FPS at 1080 or 1200p.

Crysis 2 ramped up the tessellation in an effort to make some gamer's think that their rigs were not powerful enough to run the game so that you would run out and buy another GTX 580. But the reality was that all you needed to do was turn down the tessellation by a notch or two on this console port and you would lose zero eye candy but you would be $500 richer. Please read the article below from techreport its a good read on how Crysis 2 is not as demanding as Crytek and the card makers would have you believe. After reading the article I turned down tessellation to 32X and can run the game on ultra no problems @ 1080p.

Ehh, the performance impact of tessellation is much more significant on AMD's 6xxx series cards like your 6870. One reason the 6800 and 6900 series do so poorly in 3DMark11 compared to their NVidia counterparts is due to their poor tessellation performance.

On NVidia cards, turning off tessellation doesn't make a huge difference. Certainly not on a high end card like a 580 or 680.

I also have trouble believing that your 6870 can maintain 30 FPS at 1080P with everything on Ultra, when even a 6950 only manages 26 FPS @ ultra with tessellation at 32X. Especially when the 6950 has 1408 shaders compared to just 1120 on your 6870.

Let's clear up a few things because I think some of us are missing the point.

The 670 clocks are coming at an already over clocked base core. It may not have much more over clock headroom after this. Let's see how it fairs over cocked vs over clocked of other cards before we presume it's better than anything.

If you look back, the 6950 can OC to stock 6970, the 570 can OC to stock 580 clocks. Over clock the 6970 and 580 and the 6950 and 570 lost ground fast, anywhere from 15%-20% behind. So the 670 OC will do stock 680 and the 7950 OC will do stock 7970 performance, over clock them and you will see the difference again. No one that bought 7970's and 680's should be regretting it one bit.

The difference is Nvidia has already over clocked the 670 at a higher percentage out of the gate as a base when in essence it's really already over clocked. I'm going speculate and bet it doesn't have much over clock headroom beyond it's base clock.

For those who purchased 7950's thinking how great their card compared with a 7970 initial reviews realized after the fact that over clocked they can't quite match the 7970 over clocked after all. You can expect when both are over clocked the 670 won't be able to either. It's gimped and doesn't have the full potential period.

[Take two race cars exactly the same and put a restrictor or plate on one even though they both have the same potential the race car with the restrictor plate will still fall behind.]

Set all this aside, as for the 670, you can expect it to compare quite on par with a 7950 and in some cases I'll bet will edge out ahead in games for the most part. Nvidia cards were built for gaming this time around hands down with compute power taken out of the picture. [Expect a new Qaudro soon that will blow any other card for sheer compute power.] Kepler dosen't fair as well in synthetic benchmarks because Kepler doesn't allow us to force a constant core through out the bench to show it's true potential. Don't compare these cards in synthetic benches because we don't play 3DMark11 for hours. Rather where it counts most in games where these cards shine and their ability exceeds it's competition as proven even when both have been over clocked and do it dynamically on their own while sipping power modestly and then kicking in the juice when graphic rendering calls for it.

It's a new beast in our rigs and hard for the old school over clocker to get their head around but once you play around with it, resistance is futile. It just works with little to no hasell and great results playing. The price tag will be more attractive to a wider base of people and is a great price/performance card, better than ever before.